If you listen to the mainstream media, you might come away with the impression that Iran is somehow prevailing — resilient, defiant, and still shaping events across the Middle East. The narratives often suggest that the US campaign has failed and that Tehran remains firmly in control. In reality, however, US President Donald J. Trump has pursued a strategy that departs radically from decades of precedent — one that has left the Iranian regime cornered in ways not previously seen.
Trump is attempting something that should have been done long ago. Seven U.S. presidents — both Democratic and Republican — along with the European Union and much of the international community, avoided taking such a decisive course. Whether out of caution, strategic calculation, fear of escalation, or simply cowardice, prior leaders stopped short of confronting the leadership of Iran. Then came a leader finally unwilling to appease, bribe or concede. Trump, with his businessman's grounding in reality, broke from established, failed patterns, and he forced confrontation on different terms.
Since Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, its regime has mastered the art of "strategic patience." It learned how to navigate and exploit the rules of the international system and the United Nations. It adapted to the politics of the West, where leadership changes frequently, while its own system — anchored by a long-term Supreme Leader — remains stable and constant.
When Democrats occupied the White House, Tehran pursued negotiations. During the presidency of Barack H. Obama, with his JCPOA "nuclear deal," Iran extracted unprecedented concessions and sanctions relief, receiving$1.7 billionin cash from the US, in addition tobillionsmore allegedly owed it, without having to give up anything for it – not even its nuclear program, which, due to the JCPOA's "sunset clauses," was due to become fully unrestricted in October 2025. That money helped accelerate Iran's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, as well as being used to fund Tehran's proxy terrorist groups, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Under earlier Republican administrations, Iran's regime may have braced for sanctions but assumed, correctly, that impediments would stop short of military action.
The Iranian regime built a formidable arsenal and a dependable network of proxy terrorist organizations across the Middle East. Behind them, for optimal safety and plausible deniability, Iran's regime not only "exported the revolution" to Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip; it also attackedArgentina, United States assets and officials (such ashere,hereandhere), and wasorderedby US courts to pay $6 billion for participating in the September 11, 2001 attacks. Iran advanced its military capabilities, edged closer to acquiring nuclear weapons, and bought time.
Trump's strategy not only applied pressure, but also used unpredictability, escalating beyond the reassuring playbook when required. Rather than adhering to the usual norms of the international system, Trump redefined them — combining military force, economic coercion, serious deadlines and diplomatic "off-ramps" in rapid succession — denying Iran the ability to settle into its familiar pattern of adaptation and delay.
Trump met Iran's moves with countermoves that were even stronger, instead of with restraint. Iran, for instance, has historically relied on the threat of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz as leverage over global energy markets. Trump, in a reversal of roles, turned that pressure back onto Iran's mullahs, economically and strategically, by blockadingthem.
In the economic realm, Iran remains dependent on oil, which makes upnearly 80%of its exports, making it very vulnerable to sustained maritime shipping disruptions. When revenues decline sharply, government budgets tighten, public sector salaries come under strain, and internal dissatisfaction could grow. Unlike larger and more diversified economies, Iran has only a limited capacity to absorb a prolonged blockade without consequences for the stability of its regime.
Trump's dual approach of rapid degradation of Iranian military capabilities combined with sustained economic pressure has reduced Iran's ability to project power abroad and limited its options internally by forcing it to react rather than dictate terms.
Source: Gatestone Institute :: Articles
